For much of U.S. history, public education has been regarded by policymakers and citizens alike as a local affair.\u00a0 Each community presumably has known best how to educate its children, and, as a consequence, states and localities have held primary responsibility for building schools, hiring teachers, developing curricula, and determining standards for evaluation.\u00a0 Even as the Federal Government has played a greater role in primary and secondary education since the 1960s, presidents have continued to defer to states and localities.\u00a0 In the mid-1960s, as he advocated for federal funds for public education, President Lyndon Johnson reassured his audiences that \u201cfederal assistance does not mean federal control.\u201d\u00a0 Nearly four decades later, as he called for standards, testing, and accountability in public education, President George W. Bush located agency at the state and local levels: \u201cthe agents of reform must be schools and school districts, not bureaucracies.\u201d<\/p>\n
It is in this context, then, that the movement for Common Core academic standards has proceeded as a remarkable development in U.S. education policy\u2014remarkable because, until recently, this drive for uniform academic standards across states has proceeded without controversy.\u00a0 Movement toward a common core began in the wake of the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act, which required annual testing of students in exchange for federal funding, as a problem arose in the uneven testing standards instituted by various states.\u00a0 Some states adopted fairly low standards, while other states adopted higher standards.\u00a0 To redress these disparities, a bipartisan group of governors and educators urged development of the Common Core\u2014a voluntary set of standards in math and reading for K through 12 students.<\/p>\n
Remarkably, with little fanfare, 45 states (including Wisconsin) adopted these standards.\u00a0 In a 2010 press release announcing the adoption, Wisconsin State Superintendent Tony Evers commented that \u201cthese standards are aligned with college and career expectations, will ensure academic consistency throughout the state and across other states that adopt them, and have been benchmarked against international standards from high-performing countries.\u201d<\/p>\n
The adoption of Common Core standards had proceeded shockingly smoothly\u2014until recently.\u00a0 Within the last year, a movement against the Common Core has arisen in a handful of states (including Wisconsin).\u00a0 Critics of the Common Core have rebuked the initiative as a federal takeover of public education.\u00a0 In January 2014, Gov. Scott Walker got involved, expressing a willingness to reconsider Wisconsin\u2019s participation in the Common Core.\u00a0 Walker asserted that \u201cthere\u2019s got to be a way for us to put our fingerprints on it.\u201d\u00a0 He insisted that \u201cthe standards we have in the state should be driven by people in Wisconsin.\u201d<\/p>\n
What is surprising about these arguments against the Common Core is not their content but their timing.\u00a0 Fears of a federal takeover of public education and calls for state-specific\u2014and locale-specific\u2014curricula have been around for decades.\u00a0 Critics of an ostenbily national curriculum largely remained silent when President George W. Bush called for testing and standards in 2001; they did not object loudly when the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction adopted the Common Core in 2010.\u00a0 A deep suspicion by some political groups of the current administration seems to explain much of this newfound opposition, as do the political aspirations of some elected officials.<\/p>\n
The political distrust and gamesmanship seemingly driving the opposition to the Common Core is unfortunate, because an argument for modifying the Common Core in the name of local communities could benefit public education.\u00a0 But this would require opponents of the Common Core to employ a different frame, one that points to the resonance between the bi-partisan adoption of the Common Core and the bi-partisan invocation of the market as the basis of education reform.\u00a0 For instance, as President Obama reaffirmed his predecessor\u2019s attention to standards and testing, Obama pointed to economic competition as the reason why the nation needed educational excellence: \u201ccountries that out-educate us today will out-compete us tomorrow.\u201d\u00a0 Obama proclaimed that \u201cthe currency of today\u2019s economy is knowledge.\u201d<\/p>\n
An objection to the Common Core voiced in the name of states and local communities could call for a reorientation of education with democracy rather than the market.\u00a0 This sort of objection would not rely on fear or cynicism, but it would urge policymakers, educators, and citizens to reflect on the ways that schools may bolster students\u2019 civic competencies so that they may act meaningfully as democratic agents in their communities.\u00a0 These sort of objection would see schools not only\u2014and perhaps not primarily\u2014as training grounds for workers, but as vital centers of learning and engagement in local communities.\u00a0 Standards, in and of themselves, would not raise concerns\u2014rather, advocates would object to standards that comport with an accountability regime that measures success in terms of the market and treats schools like private enterprises competing for students as customers.\u00a0 This objection would envision the nation\u2019s \u201ccommon core\u201d through the democratic heritage of ordinary folks who have worked to inspire their neighbors to realize the vision of \u201cwe the people.\u201d\u00a0 And communication in its multiple forms\u2014as deliberation, protest, commemoration, persuasion, and more\u2014would play a key role.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
For much of U.S. history, public education has been regarded by policymakers and citizens alike as a local affair.\u00a0 Each community presumably has known best how to educate its children, and, as a consequence, states and localities have held primary … Continue reading